you would think a researcher would stop once he realised effect being caused ?
Colin
On 9 Jul 2015, at 14:08, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
My guess is a researcher.
We saw the same issue in the past with a Cisco microcode bug and people doing
ping record route. When it went
Probably because he got good advise from his father :)
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Harald Koch c...@pobox.com wrote:
On 9 July 2015 at 09:11, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote:
I think you're confusing very common for a tech guy and very common for
the common man. I have a dozen or
We manage 65+ hotels in Canada and the topic of IPv6 for guest internet
connectivity has never been brought up, except by me. It's not a discussion
our vendors or the hotel brands have opened either.
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mel Beckman m...@beckman.org wrote:
I working on a large
I’m sure they did. It could also have been any number of other things. I’m
just guessing. It could have been someone trying to scan their enterprise too
and went a bit rogue.
Not everyone reads NANOG believe it or not :)
Either way, if you haven’t upgraded for a 9 month old security
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Colin Johnston col...@gt86car.org.uk wrote:
you would think a researcher would stop once he realised effect being caused ?
how would he/she know?
On Jul 9, 2015, at 9:53 AM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
It’s my understanding that many captive portals have trouble with IPv6
traffic and this is a blocker for places.
I’m wondering what people who deploy captive portals are doing with these
things?
On 9 July 2015 at 09:11, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote:
I think you're confusing very common for a tech guy and very common for
the common man. I have a dozen or two v4 subnets in my house. Then again, I
also run my ISP out of my house, so I have a ton of stuff going on. I can't
even
Most hotels etc, are perfectly happy doing NAT.
Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.
den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – www.linktechs.net
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Oliver O'Boyle
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 10:20 AM
To:
I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is allowed for in
the future but not configured in the short term. With less than 10,000
ephemeral users, we don't expect users to demand IPv6 until most mobile devices
and apps come ready to use IPv6 by default.
-mel beckman
On
On Thursday, July 9, 2015, Mel Beckman m...@beckman.org wrote:
I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is allowed
for in the future but not configured in the short term. With less than
10,000 ephemeral users, we don't expect users to demand IPv6 until most
mobile devices
Yep, because most don't even know what NAT is!
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Dennis Burgess dmburg...@linktechs.net
wrote:
Most hotels etc, are perfectly happy doing NAT.
Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.
den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – www.linktechs.net
-Original
It’s my understanding that many captive portals have trouble with IPv6 traffic
and this is a blocker for places.
I’m wondering what people who deploy captive portals are doing with these
things?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dhc-capport
seems to be trying to document the method to
On Jul 9, 2015, at 08:42 , Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote:
What am I missing? Is it just the splitting on the sextet boundary that is an
issue, or do people think people really need 64k subnets per household?
It’s the need for a large enough bitfield to do more flexible things with
What am I missing? Is it just the splitting on the sextet boundary that is an
issue, or do people think people really need 64k subnets per household?
With /56 you are giving each residential customer:
256 subnets x 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 hosts per subnet.
I would expect at least 95.0% of
On 9 July 2015 at 11:42, Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote:
What am I missing? Is it just the splitting on the sextet boundary that is
an issue, or do people think people really need 64k subnets per household?
One thing you're missing is that some of these new-fangled uses for IP
networking
When I see a car that needs a /56 subnet then I’ll take your use case
seriously. Otherwise, it’s just plain laughable. Yes, I could theorize a use
case for this, but then I could theorize that someday everyone will get to work
using jetpacks.
We have prefix delegation already via DHCP-PD, but
It seems like there might be several incorrect assumptions here leading to over
thinking the issue.
1. Over a long period of time, will the size or number of subnets be
significantly different than today. Even today a bunch of our assumptions on
why subnets are created the way they
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Harald Koch c...@pobox.com wrote:
On 9 July 2015 at 11:42, Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote:
What am I missing? Is it just the splitting on the sextet boundary that is
an issue, or do people think people really need 64k subnets per household?
It is wasting that
On Jul 9, 2015, at 09:16 , Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote:
When I see a car that needs a /56 subnet then I’ll take your use case
seriously. Otherwise, it’s just plain laughable. Yes, I could theorize a use
case for this, but then I could theorize that someday everyone will get to
work
Den 09/07/2015 18.08 skrev Owen DeLong o...@delong.com:
That will never happen. If you offer me $1000 per IPv4, then I will
happily
terminate some user contracts and sell their IP space to you…
Eventually, you run out of user contracts to terminate.
At $1000 per contract I do not care. I
My parents are non-technical.
Other than a little help connecting her airport to the cable modem, I had
nothing to do with the design and implementation of their networks.
They have at least 7 distinct subnets in their house that I know of.
Some of them are routed together. Some of them are
Absolutely agree. It's not their job to even know to ask for a specific
protocol version in the first place. Their experience should be as seamless
and consistent as possible at all times.
What we should be be concerned about is that the hospitality industry is so
far behind the game on
Just turn IPv6 on when you can.
We manage 65+ hotels in Canada and the topic of IPv6 for guest internet
connectivity has never been brought up, except by me. It's not a discussion
our
vendors or the hotel brands have opened either.
I would argue customers never asked an IPv4 connection
On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, Ca By wrote:
On Thursday, July 9, 2015, Mel Beckman m...@beckman.org wrote:
I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is allowed
for in the future but not configured in the short term. With less than
10,000 ephemeral users, we don't expect users to
On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:45 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:05:00 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Look again… IPv6 is already more than 20% of Google traffic in the US.
20% of *1*
On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 19:06 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
Solutions looking for problems. I get a few subnets (though don't
foresee it being likely). Someone here was mentioning dozens or
hundreds of subnets for a residential customer. Um, no.
Actually I was mentioning thousands.
What you
On Jul 9, 2015, at 9:02 PM, Matthew Kaufman
matt...@matthew.atmailto:matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong
o...@delong.commailto:o...@delong.com wrote:
...
You are correct… In order for 20% of Google’s traffic to come from IPv6
connected devices, there would
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 21:48:06 -0400, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:
Both techniques indicate more than 20% of the US Internet users are
connecting via IPv6.
Interesting method that's full of holes (and they know it), but it's data
nonetheless.
Globally, it's still ~4.5%. Within my own
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared Mauch
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 9:08 AM
To: Colin Johnston
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?
My guess is a researcher.
I wouldn't classify someone sending known
On Jul 9, 2015, at 9:31 PM, John Curran
jcur...@arin.netmailto:jcur...@arin.net wrote:
...
Both techniques indicate more than 20% of the US Internet users are connecting
via IPv6.
You might also want to review Paul Saab’s presentation regarding what Facebook
actually
sees for IPv6 traffic and
On Jul 9, 2015, at 16:28 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 19:08:56 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
the reality I’m trying to point out is that application developers make
assumptions based
on the commonly deployed environment that they expect in the
In message d51a9dbc-03a7-4ce9-88ec-17d7d7570...@matthew.at, Matthew Kaufman w
rites:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:45 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:05:00 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:08 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:55 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:23:29 -0400, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com
wrote:
That would be Tivo's fault wouldn't it.
Partially, even mostly... it's based on
On Jul 9, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Chuck Church chuckchu...@gmail.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared Mauch
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 9:08 AM
To: Colin Johnston
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA
In message 011d01d0bab1$e7890a00$b69b1e00$@gmail.com, Chuck Church writes:
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared Mauch
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 9:08 AM
To: Colin Johnston
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA
On Jul 9, 2015, at 18:19 , Laszlo Hanyecz las...@heliacal.net wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:08 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:55 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:23:29 -0400, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com
wrote:
That
hum.. let me postulate.
my lan, my kids, my guests, the drive-bys, … the LG stuff, the Apple stuff,
the whitebox stuff, appliances … smart meters, switches, thermostats, toilets,
water flow controls, …
Microsoft can talk to the x-box, but i have no desire for them t see/know
anything else
On Jul 8, 2015, at 19:22 , Israel G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com wrote:
On 07/09/2015 02:31 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Here’s the problem… You started at the wrong end and worked in the wrong
direction in your planning.
[...get larger allocation...]
We are now left with only
Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
Talking about IPv6, we aren't carving a limit in granite. 99.9% of home
networks currently have no need for multiple networks, and thus, don't ask for
anything more; they get a single /64 prefix.
Personal-area networks already exist. Phone/watch/laptop
On 8/Jul/15 21:32, Owen DeLong wrote:
I think the “THING” that people are starting to worry about is how to deploy
a network when you can’t get IPv4 space for it at a reasonable price.
I suppose the issue will become more real when you can't get any IPv4
space period.
Mark.
Really just people not patching their software after warnings more than six
months ago:
July-08 UPDATE: Cisco PSIRT is aware of disruption to some Cisco customers with
Cisco ASA devices affected by CVE-2014-3383, the Cisco ASA VPN Denial of
Service Vulnerability that was disclosed in this
Hi,
With RIPE you can get a /29 with no justification, so if you have any less
it is because you did not bother logging in to ripe.net and hit the get
more button.
ARIN gives you the option to make a network scheme based on nibbles but
RIPE does not, so do not go there. Why try to allocate by
Residential users just buy another router for wifi coverage at the local wall
mart. They have no clue about anything internet.
That is why isp CPE devices should always perform dhcp-pd on their own to
provide a prefix to the downstream devices so those have globally routed ipv6
too.
For that
On Jul 8, 2015, at 21:55 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:49:17 -0400, Karl Auer ka...@biplane.com.au wrote:
You, we, all of us have to stop using the present to limit the future.
What IS should not be used to define what SHOULD BE.
What people NOW HAVE in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 8/Jul/15 22:23, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
(2) they use NAT64 (RFC 6146/6147) translation
The only issue with NAT64 is that you still need some IPv4 space.
If you can't get any anymore, despite all the millions of $$ in your
bank, then we'll
Hi Jared,
thanks for update
do you know provider/source ip of the source of the attack ?
Colin
On 9 Jul 2015, at 12:27, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Really just people not patching their software after warnings more than six
months ago:
July-08 UPDATE: Cisco PSIRT is aware
Using one-byte buffers, one hopes. :)
-mel via cell
On Jul 8, 2015, at 8:49 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Karl Auer ka...@biplane.com.au wrote:
On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 21:03 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
I wasn't aware that residential users had
On 9 July 2015 at 13:25, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
I suppose the issue will become more real when you can't get any IPv4
space period.
Mark.
That will never happen. If you offer me $1000 per IPv4, then I will happily
terminate some user contracts and sell their IP space to
On 9/Jul/15 14:53, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
That will never happen. If you offer me $1000 per IPv4, then I will happily
terminate some user contracts and sell their IP space to you...
In fact it will never become even that expensive. With a marked price of
$10 I am buying IP space for
I think you're confusing very common for a tech guy and very common for the
common man. I have a dozen or two v4 subnets in my house. Then again, I also
run my ISP out of my house, so I have a ton of stuff going on. I can't even
think of a handful of other people that would have more than one.
Sounds like someone's getting caught up in the hype of a few buzzwords. I can't
imagine where more than a couple bits of separately isolated networks in a home
would be required. Most of those things you mentioned have no need to be
isolated and are just being used to support a decision that
Don't confuse someone's poor design with design goals.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com
To: Karl Auer ka...@biplane.com.au
Hello,
is someone from GBLX/Level 3/Telia around?
It looks like there's a problem with one of your peerings/LAGs.
The problem exists since 00:36 UTC
working path:
traceroute from 71.80.34.222 to 151.248.24.61 (151.248.24.61), 30 hops
max, 40 byte packets
1 192.168.30.1 (192.168.30.1) 0.416 ms
My guess is a researcher.
We saw the same issue in the past with a Cisco microcode bug and people doing
ping record route. When it went across a LC with a very specific set of
software it would crash.
If you crashed just upgrade your code, don't hide behind blocking an IP as
people now know
I've seen VLAN/subnet security used frequently in the financial world, even to
the point of having full firewalls between vlans/subnets. Mostly for regulator
purposes (Chinese firewall and all that). It's also common to allow outbound
requests or redirect to different proxies based on source
And I’m saying you’re ignoring an important part of reality.
Whatever ISPs default to deploying now will become the standard to which
application developers develop.
Changing the ISP later is easy.
Changing the applications is hard.
Let’s not bake unnecessary limitations into applications by
one word.RFC 1918. Here is an perpetual well of IPv4, packed down,
overflowing.
manning
bmann...@karoshi.com
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102
On 9July2015Thursday, at 6:02, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On 9/Jul/15 14:53, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
That
Huh, since when does ANY application care about what size address allocation
you have? A V6 address is a 128 bit address period. Any IPv6 aware
application will handle addresses as a 128 bit variable.
Does any application running on IPv4 care if you have a /28 or a /29? In fact
the
Oliver O'Boyle wrote:
It's not their job to even know to ask for a specific
protocol version in the first place
No. They should just ask, with the best geek intonation, whether this
place still is stuck with 32-bit Internet.
Grüße, Carsten
- On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote:
Huh, since when does ANY application care about what size address allocation
you
have? A V6 address is a 128 bit address period. Any IPv6 aware application
will handle addresses as a 128 bit variable.
The
Unfortunately, the hotel staff wouldn't be able to answer that question.
But they might give them free internet in exchange and hope the guest
doesn't ask any more questions!
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Carsten Bormann c...@tzi.org wrote:
Oliver O'Boyle wrote:
It's not their job to even
Sigh…
Home gateways are an application in this context. How the firmware gets written
in those things will be affected.
Further, applications do care about things like “Can I assume that every home
is reachable in its entirety via a packet to ff02::group?” which is, for
example, already baked
On Jul 9, 2015, at 3:38 PM, Tyler Applebaum appleba...@ochin.org wrote:
Do people actually use VLANs for security? It's nice to implement them for
organizational purposes and to prevent broadcast propagation.
I would generally say yes. For example, if you are a wireless access point you
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 08:02:40AM -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
Sounds like someone's getting caught up in the hype of a few buzzwords. I
can't imagine where more than a couple bits of separately isolated networks
in a home would be required. Most of those things you mentioned have no need
to
I don't have a problem with that use case IF there is a real firewall between
VLANs. I was mostly referring to residential networks however. As far as
guest access, a lot of today's CPE does that with its internal firewall
creating an ACL for anyone on the guest network. The VLAN barrier is
In short, I'm saying that you should set your default so it is easily changed
on the fly and then it won't matter if you are wrong.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
In short, much of what you say below has been discussed before and with the
general conclusion “geography != topology and no,
You quickly run into religion here.
I run my home as a big broadcast domain, but there's no reason I
wouldn't perhaps segment things differently. There are a lot of people who
just extend their wifi by plugging in a 2nd router with a long cable and
don't realize they now have
Seems to me that the problem might be thinking that the allocation toward the
customer is a static thing. I think it is limiting to think that was going
forward. Our industry created DHCP so we didn't have to deal with statically
configured users who did not want to deal with IP addressing.
Do people actually use VLANs for security? It's nice to implement them for
organizational purposes and to prevent broadcast propagation.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Naslund, Steve
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 12:24 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Yes, and that is a problem. Usually because it is not granular enough and
there are a lot of ways to get onto another VLAN (physical access and packet
trickery). It is a pretty weak form of security policy.
Now, if we assume that VLAN based security is weak and that most homes do not
In short, much of what you say below has been discussed before and with the
general conclusion “geography != topology and no, geographic allocation would
not improve summarization”.
I’m not saying that assignments need to be static, but I am saying that we need
to put the default size
- On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote:
In short, I'm saying that you should set your default so it is easily changed
on
the fly and then it won't matter if you are wrong.
Absolutely.
Also, since it won't matter if we are wrong, let's use /48 as the
On Jul 9, 2015, at 05:53 , Baldur Norddahl baldur.nordd...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 July 2015 at 13:25, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
I suppose the issue will become more real when you can't get any IPv4
space period.
Mark.
That will never happen. If you offer me $1000
Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote:
When I see a car that needs a /56 subnet then I’ll take your use case
seriously.
Cars need partitions between their automotive network, their entertainment
network, and their passenger wifi.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
Sure, they may be 100,000+ networks like that in non-technical households.
Maybe. I doubt it, but still that would be like 0.01%. Many consumer systems
have trouble with L3 hops (mDNS/Bonjour, etc...). First thing tech support will
suggest it to put them on the same network. People have been
Unfortunately, there are still some that would report 2mbit via dsl and
think that was ahead of their competition (and it might be in some
cases...)...
On Jul 9, 2015 5:51 PM, Alan Buxey a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
No. They should just ask, with the best geek intonation, whether this
place
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:05:00 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Look again… IPv6 is already more than 20% of Google traffic in the US.
20% of *1* site's traffic does not equal 20% DEPLOYMENT. (read: 20% of
internet DEVICES (CPE) connected by IPv6)
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:23:29 -0400, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com
wrote:
That would be Tivo's fault wouldn't it.
Partially, even mostly... it's based on Bonjour. That's why the shit
doesn't work over the internet.
(It's just http/https, so it will, in fact, work, but their apps
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:45 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:05:00 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Look again… IPv6 is already more than 20% of Google traffic in the US.
20% of *1* site's traffic does not equal 20% DEPLOYMENT. (read: 20% of
internet
On Jul 9, 2015, at 15:55 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:23:29 -0400, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com
wrote:
That would be Tivo's fault wouldn't it.
Partially, even mostly... it's based on Bonjour. That's why the shit doesn't
work over the internet.
In message 9578293ae169674f9a048b2bc9a081b401c7097...@munprdmbxa1.medline.com
, Naslund, Steve writes:
Subject: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
Because vendor pressure depends on a userbase that knows enough to
demand fixes.
No vendor pressure is dependent on people buying
Yes, the reason is that we'd never had ARIN turn down a request due to space
exhaustion before. In 12 months we'll see the prices will go up significantly.
Don't underestimate the demand, which is easily measured via ARIN space
allocation reports. That demand rate has very little flexibility,
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 07:27:16 -0400, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net
wrote:
Really just people not patching their software after warnings more than
six months ago:
A lot goes into updates. Not the least of which is *knowing* about the
issue. Then getting the patched code, then lab
On Jul 9, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 07:27:16 -0400, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Really just people not patching their software after warnings more than six
months ago:
A lot goes into updates. Not the least of which is
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 11:08:53 -0400, Marco Teixeira
ad...@marcoteixeira.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Harald Koch c...@pobox.com wrote:
The common man is becoming much more sophisticated in their networking
requirements, and they need this stuff to just work. Please don't place
No. They should just ask, with the best geek intonation, whether this
place still is stuck with 32-bit Internet
I'm sure they'd gladly report that their Internet is 24 mbit and not just 32
bit
;)
alan
On 09/07/2015 22:35, Ricky Beam wrote:
Free if you have a support contract.
No, free-as-in-beer.
You register a guest CCO account, email t...@cisco.com, provide the device
serial number (or output of show hardware) and the bugid + Cisco PSIRT
URL reference. Cisco TAC will then provide you with
Huh, since when does ANY application care about what size address
allocation you have? A V6 address is a 128 bit address period. Any
IPv6 aware application will handle addresses as a 128 bit variable.
The DHCPv6-PD server application on your router(s) might care.
Do you know of a
On Jul 9, 2015, at 14:50 , Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 11:08:53 -0400, Marco Teixeira ad...@marcoteixeira.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Harald Koch c...@pobox.com wrote:
The common man is becoming much more sophisticated in their networking
Because vendor pressure depends on a userbase that knows enough to demand fixes.
Simple fact is that if most ISPs deploy degraded services, vendors will code to
the lowest common denominator of that degraded service and we’ll all be forced
to live within those limitations in the products we
Subject: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
Because vendor pressure depends on a userbase that knows enough to demand
fixes.
No vendor pressure is dependent on people buying their stuff. Don't send that
CPE to your user if it does not meet your standards. If their stuff breaks
because
So, why not demand that firmware accepts ANY mask length just like VLSM v4. I
don't see what possible difference it will make if it is a /56 or /48 and I
don't think you should make ANY assumption based on either of those being
correct for any particular application. An assumption you make
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Harald Koch c...@pobox.com wrote:
The common man is becoming much more sophisticated in their
networking requirements, and they need this stuff to just work.
Please don't place artificially small limits just because you can't see a
need.
Probably because
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 16:00:35 -0400, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com
wrote:
Now, if we assume that VLAN based security is weak and that most homes
do not generate enough broadcast traffic to be an issue, what exactly is
the reason that a residential customer needs a lot of VLANs? Answer,
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 19:08:56 -0400, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
the reality I’m trying to point out is that application developers make
assumptions based
on the commonly deployed environment that they expect in the world.
Partially. It's also a matter of the software guys not having
On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 08:02 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
I can't imagine [...]
And that, right there, is the problem.
Regards, K.
--
~~~
Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au)
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
Solutions looking for problems. I get a few subnets (though don't foresee it
being likely). Someone here was mentioning dozens or hundreds of subnets for a
residential customer. Um, no.
If you feel the need to segment private wire and private wireless, okay. Then
there's guest... um, and M2M?
97 matches
Mail list logo